Tea Party Senator: Gun Control Agenda Is ‘Unconstitutional’

Ted Cruz, the new Republican and Tea Party U.S. Senator from Texas says Democrats’ “gun control agent” is “unconstitutional,” adding the federal government has “no business” tracking guns. He also claimed politicians “within minutes” of the Sandy Hook shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, were trying to “exploit” the tragedy to help protect the nation.

“The reason we are discussing this is because of the the tragedy in Newtown,” Cruz told Fox News’ guest host John Roberts on Sunday. “And every parent, my wife and I we have two girls aged four and two, every parent was horrified at what happened there. To see 20 children, six dults senselessly murdered it takes your breath away. But within minutes, we saw politicians run out and try to exploit and push their political agenda of gun control. I do not suppor their gun control agenda for two reasons. Number one, it is it unconstitutional.”

Cruz adamantly opposes a ban of assault weapons or high-capacity magazines, like the ones used in the Sandy Hook, Aurora, and Gabby Giffords shootings, and he adamantly opposes a federal gun registry.

“I don’t think the federal government has any business having a list of law-abiding citizens who choose to exercise their right to keep and bear arms.”

The right to bear arms is protected by the Second Amendment, but it is not absolute and lawmakers have introduced a series of common-sense restrictions. For instance, in the Heller case, the Supreme Court found that while a handgun ban is not constitutional, because handguns are in “common use,” a machine gun is not and therefore could be restricted. An assault weapon equipped with a clip that can shoot hundreds of rounds would likely fall into the same category. As conservative Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, “the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns.”

The National Firearms Act of 1934 was actually a direct response to the acute rise in prohibition (1919-33) engendered gun violence.

PROHIBITION EQUATES TO MORE VIOLENT CRIME

The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada recently reviewed 15 studies that evaluated the association between violence and drug law enforcement. "Our ﬁndings suggest that increasing drug law enforcement is unlikely to reduce drug market violence. Instead, the existing evidence base suggests that gun violence and high homicide rates may be an inevitable consequence of drug prohibition and that disrupting drug markets can paradoxically increase violence."http://tinyurl.com/c4uyecn

Prohibition has diverted police resources away from other law enforcement activities, with the result that violent crimes and crimes against property have been higher than they would otherwise have been. To the extent that communities divert law enforcement resources from violent crimes to illegal drug offenses, the risk of punishment for engaging in violent crimes is reduced.

During alcohol prohibition, all profits went to enrich criminals and corrupt politicians. Young men died every day on inner-city streets while battling over turf. A fortune was wasted on enforcement that could have gone on education, etc. On top of the budget-busting prosecution and incarceration costs, billions in taxes were lost. Finally, the economy collapsed. Sound familiar?

Prohibitionists, and their gun-control criminal friends who live in a crack-house called Congress, are having a ball and it's all on our tab.

malcolmkyleJanuary 7, 2013 at 11:20 am

The National Firearms Act of 1934 was actually a direct response to the acute rise in prohibition (1919-33) engendered gun violence.

PROHIBITION EQUATES TO MORE VIOLENT CRIME

The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada recently reviewed 15 studies that evaluated the association between violence and drug law enforcement. "Our ﬁndings suggest that increasing drug law enforcement is unlikely to reduce drug market violence. Instead, the existing evidence base suggests that gun violence and high homicide rates may be an inevitable consequence of drug prohibition and that disrupting drug markets can paradoxically increase violence."

Prohibition has diverted police resources away from other law enforcement activities, with the result that violent crimes and crimes against property have been higher than they would otherwise have been. To the extent that communities divert law enforcement resources from violent crimes to illegal drug offenses, the risk of punishment for engaging in violent crimes is reduced.

During alcohol prohibition, all profits went to enrich criminals and corrupt politicians. Young men died every day on inner-city streets while battling over turf. A fortune was wasted on enforcement that could have gone on education, etc. On top of the budget-busting prosecution and incarceration costs, billions in taxes were lost. Finally, the economy collapsed. Sound familiar?

Prohibitionists, and their gun-control criminal friends who live in a crack-house called Congress, are having a ball and it's all on our tab.

SiddigfanJanuary 7, 2013 at 10:25 pm

No one is advocating taking away guns from people who are actually trained properly to use them.Most handgun owners can't even pull the gun out of the holster in a time of crisis. You must train very hard every month in combat type situations for more hours than any civilian has the time or will even bother. They have the illusion that all they need is to buy the gun and target practice a little and that, somehow, in a crisis, they will just act instinctively. Doesn't happen that way. They often are more dangerous to themselves and the others around them than the shooter!
How much scarier to think of assault rifles in the hands of these non-combat trained people The NRA Thinks More Guns Are The Answer. Bless Their Hearts. Then Watch This. http://www.upworthy.com/the-nra-thinks-more-guns-…

arthurideJanuary 12, 2013 at 8:37 pm

When someone with as little knowledge of US history of the Constitution of the USA as Ted Cruz (who was born in Canada, and therefore, fortunately, ineligible to ever be president of the USA) is put into a
Senate seat, you know that the state (Texas) that elected him has lost its ability to reason or think logically. Cruz, like the NRA, deliberately misread and lie about the Second Amendment that states clearly that a person can have a gun kept in an armory (that is what "well-regulated militia" meant in 1776-1780) and never hinted that gun ownership is a personal, unrestricted right. Cruz will definitely be the poster-boy for the USA home-grown terrorist group National Rifle Association and the gaggle of goons that goose-step behind its attacks on common people in their draconian effort to destroy democracy and return the USA to the wild wild west mentality of "shoot 'em up" and kill on sight. Cruz's bombastic ignorance will lead the mentally unhinged into a gory glory of internal strife and sacrifice futhre generations their right to a peaceful life. Texas should secede and take its Mephistophlian monster with it back to the primordial ooze from which it belched.